What Do We Think About Climate Change

well I needed a break from studying and could just hear all the deniers over hear singing kumbaya together

I got a particularly good laugh out of the admonition to address the phony science, as if I have never done that before
right

who was it that wanted to go back through the basics of the albedo issue and follow the known science to a conclusion if possible

its really one funny break to come read this stuff
who was it that wanted to address the issue starting at the basics in order to start from a place of agreement and find the exact spot of disagreement

and not one denier would play along

why is that guys
and then you come back a few pages later and want an explanation
love it

thanks for laughs and the break
you guys are being particularly helpful

and expecting some more drivel attempting the typical denial of the evidence I used another search engine and googled "97% of scientists agree" and got 5 million 8 hundred and 20 thousand hits
of which over the first two pages ~about half report the number in exactly the way I had

course I notice you guys seemed to have dropped it so I guess I should as well

have a great night guys
I gotta get back to it I suppose
best
B

 

This link not only breaks the hockey stick, it debunks the rest of the AGW dogma.

 

For thought:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU

This where we live.....

 

Knut, Excellent stuff, forces one to think and appreciate the stupidity of our actions - past and future, for I feel we, humanity, fail to learn.....

 

Sorry about the technical glitch before, this is the link I meant to post, some fun reading.....

http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html

 

YAWN!

 

A glacier advancing a third of a mile in a year implies savage melt underneath to facilitate such a rapid move - I suggest you stand-by for the result of the summer melt season and watch how quickly that breaks off and reduces....?

 

The crux of the argument, the assumption...

1. The warmer we get the less cloud we get, the warmer we get, vicious cycle to catastrophe.

or

2. The warmer we get the more cloud we get, the more cloud we get the greater the counter trend or balancing effect.

1.... just does not ring true!

You know if the broad media buy the idea its almost certianly wrong.

 

Question:

Answer:

The National Academy of Sciences has found Mann's graph to have “a validation skill not significantly different from zero” – i.e., the graph is useless.

Read the M & M report posted earlier, for the gory details.

Jimbo

 

"As we predicted last year, 2007 was warmer than 2006, continuing the strong warming trend of the past 30 years that has been confidently attributed to the effect of increasing human-made greenhouse gases," Hansen said.




Jimbo

 

Silly humans - not a single one of you, your children, our their children, our their grandchildren will be around to see to polar, weather or solar climatic changes. It takes centuries, and more like thousands of years before a significant change happens.

The fact is our whole civilization is a speck on the global calendar.

It is like trying to boil a pot of water with lighter.

 

They have been re thinking the big freeze's, I am told, there is some suspicion that once tripped i.e. the ocean heat transports shut down, the big freeze could be quite rapid ---> unlike previously thought! A phase transition type of event as opposed to a gradual change. Who knows? I don't

 

Reasons for fast glacier movements may be other than melting water under them.

Glaciers move mainly due to three main processes:

- internal deformation due to ice straining and recrystallization.
- basal sliding
- deformation of soft sub-basal sediments.

There can also happen other phenomena, such as kinematic waves and surges. Surging glaciers are the fastest ones, moving hundreds of meters per day.

http://web.pdx.edu/~mbruneng/Flow_mjb.ppt#373,30,Glacier movement
http://iahs.info/redbooks/a047/04726.pdf

Cheers.

 

Wonderful images.
Poverty is what we should be fighting against, instead of spending zillions in mawkishness and hysteria. In my opinion all this GWA thing is nothing but another prove of our squanderer and hedonistic societies' hypocresy.

Cheers.

 

....like the hypocresy of some countries which mainly live (very well!) from exploting oil and gas fields with little respect for the original inhabitants of the regions or the voice of the enviros and selling (at a high price!) the black stuff to the rest of humanity for them to contaminate the planet, while such countries' citizens quiet down their consciences claiming they behave 'green'...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Norway-goverment-1st-Barents-apf-15179458.html?.v=1

Cheers